Improving Education Outcomes by Empowering Parents, States, and Communities
President Trump issued a Presidential Action ordering the closure of the Department of Education.
The order argues that federal control of education has failed, citing low test scores and significant taxpayer spending with little return, and asserts that returning authority to states and local communities will lead to improved educational outcomes.
The Secretary of Education is tasked with facilitating the closure and reallocation of funds while ensuring compliance with federal law, prohibiting discrimination and initiatives promoting gender ideology.
The order includes provisions outlining non-interference with executive agency authorities and budgetary functions, while stating that it does not create any legally enforceable rights.
Arguments For
Intended benefits: The order aims to improve education outcomes by eliminating what it deems a failing federal bureaucracy and returning control to states and local communities, ultimately leading to better alignment with parental and community needs.
Evidence cited: The order cites low American reading and math scores, specifically referencing the National Assessment of Educational Progress data showing high rates of students below proficiency levels.
Implementation methods: The order directs the Secretary of Education to take the necessary steps to close the Department of Education and return authority to states while maintaining service delivery. It also mandates compliance with federal laws and administration policy, including a ban on what it considers illegal discrimination and the promotion of gender ideology in federally funded programs.
Legal/historical basis: The order is based on the President’s constitutional authority and the laws of the United States. It points to the relatively recent creation of the Department of Education (1979) as a failed experiment in federal control of education.
Arguments Against
Potential impacts: Closing the Department of Education could lead to funding disruptions, inconsistencies in educational standards across states, and a lack of federal oversight to ensure equal access to education.
Implementation challenges: Transitioning to a state-controlled model poses significant logistical challenges that likely would require significant additional resources, as well as political hurdles in managing varied state approaches to education.
Alternative approaches: Reform within the Department of Education, focusing on increased accountability and efficiency, could be explored as an alternative to complete closure. Further, addressing systemic inequalities within the existing framework instead of restructuring its core is an alternative approach.
Unintended effects: The focus on eliminating 'diversity, equity, and inclusion' initiatives might exacerbate existing inequalities and limit efforts to promote inclusivity in education. The order’s lack of details on how federal student loan programs will transition could create widespread disruptions for students, further exacerbating existing debt-related problems.
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and to enable parents, teachers, and communities to best ensure student success, it is hereby ordered:
Section 1. Purpose and Policy. Our Nation’s bright future relies on empowered families, engaged communities, and excellent educational opportunities for every child. Unfortunately, the experiment of controlling American education through Federal programs and dollars — and the unaccountable bureaucracy those programs and dollars support — has plainly failed our children, our teachers, and our families.
Taxpayers spent around $200 billion at the Federal level on schools during the COVID-19 pandemic, on top of the more than $60 billion they spend annually on Federal school funding. This money is largely distributed by one of the newest Cabinet agencies, the Department of Education, which has existed for less than one fifth of our Nation’s history. The Congress created the Department of Education in 1979 at the urging of President Jimmy Carter, who received a first-ever Presidential endorsement from the country’s largest teachers’ union shortly after pledging to the union his support for a separate Department of Education. Since then, the Department of Education has entrenched the education bureaucracy and sought to convince America that Federal control over education is beneficial. While the Department of Education does not educate anyone, it maintains a public relations office that includes over 80 staffers at a cost of more than $10 million per year.
Closing the Department of Education would provide children and their families the opportunity to escape a system that is failing them. Today, American reading and math scores are near historical lows. This year’s National Assessment of Educational Progress showed that 70 percent of 8th graders were below proficient in reading, and 72 percent were below proficient in math. The Federal education bureaucracy is not working.
Closure of the Department of Education would drastically improve program implementation in higher education. The Department of Education currently manages a student loan debt portfolio of more than $1.6 trillion. This means the Federal student aid program is roughly the size of one of the Nation’s largest banks, Wells Fargo. But although Wells Fargo has more than 200,000 employees, the Department of Education has fewer than 1,500 in its Office of Federal Student Aid. The Department of Education is not a bank, and it must return bank functions to an entity equipped to serve America’s students.
Ultimately, the Department of Education’s main functions can, and should, be returned to the States.
This section establishes the order’s purpose: to close the Department of Education.
It argues that the federal department's control over education has been ineffective, pointing to billions spent on programs yet low student test scores.
The order emphasizes returning control to states as a solution.
It specifically notes the large cost of the Department’s public relations office and large student loan debt portfolio, inadequately managed by the Department’s limited staffing, as further evidence of its failure.
Sec. 2. Closing the Department of Education and Returning Authority to the States. (a) The Secretary of Education shall, to the maximum extent appropriate and permitted by law, take all necessary steps to facilitate the closure of the Department of Education and return authority over education to the States and local communities while ensuring the effective and uninterrupted delivery of services, programs, and benefits on which Americans rely.
(b) Consistent with the Department of Education’s authorities, the Secretary of Education shall ensure that the allocation of any Federal Department of Education funds is subject to rigorous compliance with Federal law and Administration policy, including the requirement that any program or activity receiving Federal assistance terminate illegal discrimination obscured under the label “diversity, equity, and inclusion” or similar terms and programs promoting gender ideology.
This section outlines the actions to be taken.
The Secretary of Education is directed to close the Department and return control to states and local communities while maintaining services.
The order also specifies that the allocation of federal funding must comply with federal law and administration policies, emphasizing the cessation of funding for what it terms 'illegal discrimination' and 'gender ideology' initiatives.
Sec. 3. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
This section contains general provisions clarifying that the order does not affect existing executive department authority or the budgetary functions of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
It also emphasizes that the order’s implementation depends on existing law and available funding, and importantly states that it does not create any legally binding rights or benefits.